韓国人日本語学習者の言語能力別にみた 「共話的反応の型」の使用実態

Abstract

This study examines the tendency of the usage of co-construction responses and their functions according to the proficiency of Korean learners of the Japanese language (hereinafter referred to as KLJ). The following results were obtained by examining how they are used in the discourse and how they are involved in the discourse development, and comparing the characteristics of co-construction responses used by Korean learners of the Japanese language with those used by native Japanese speakers. 1. As for co-construction responses, the use of ‘anticipation’, ‘interruption’, and ‘repetition’ was identified at beginner’s level and the use of ‘paraphrasing’ at intermediate level. As for their functions, ‘supplements’, ‘counterarguments’, and ‘agreement’ were used at beginner’s and intermediate levels. And ‘assistance’ function was identified at advanced and superior levels. 2. As for the differences in the use of co-construction responses and their functions by KLJ and native Japanese speakers, ‘counter questioning’ and ‘confirmation’ which were used by native Japanese speakers were not found in KLJ. The report of Mizutani in 1995 that foreign learners of the Japanese language have difficulty in using co-constructions is seen as a discussion focusing on this function of ‘confirmation’. It is considered necessary to provide well-informed guidelines on the usage of the co-constructions to KLJ since it is difficult to naturally acquire the ability to properly use the function(s) of ‘confirmation’ which is often not available even at advanced level. 3. Moreover, it was found that KLJ use ‘interruption’ most frequently while native Japanese speakers use ‘anticipation’ most frequently. Among 5 types of co-construction responses, only ‘anticipation’ and ‘interruption’ can make a significant contribution　to conversation and keep the conversation going on. However, since ‘interruption’ is to interrupt while others are talking and sometimes they can be offended, it is considered that KLJ are likely to use it frequently and smooth conversation development can be interrupted, while Japanese native speakers do not use it frequently. It is assumed that the usage of co-construction responses can be naturally acquired through daily communication with Japanese people. On the other hand, the difficulty of natural acquisition of the usage was also highlighted. Support of smooth operation and communication of co-construction responses is necessary in Japanese language education.